News & Analysis as of

Franchisee Antitrust Violations

Lewitt Hackman

Franchisor 101: Farsighted Vision for System Changes

Lewitt Hackman on

An Ohio federal court granted a franchisor’s motion to dismiss a putative class of franchisees alleging antitrust violations and related claims, including interference to deflate franchisees’ reimbursement rates. Other class...more

Quarles & Brady LLP

Seventh Circuit Rejects Dismissal of Franchisee No-Poach Clause Challenge

Quarles & Brady LLP on

In Deslandes v. McDonald’s USA LLC, issued August 25, 2023, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit overturned the dismissal of antitrust claims that challenged no-poach clauses in franchise agreements....more

Bilzin Sumberg

Eleventh Circuit Revives Putative Class Action Against Burger King for Violation of Federal Antitrust Laws Based on No-Poaching...

Bilzin Sumberg on

Arrington v. Burger King Worldwide, Inc., No. 20-13561 (11th Cir. Aug. 31, 2022) – In October 2018, a former line cook of a Burger King franchise restaurant in Illinois, filed a class action complaint in the District Court...more

Lewitt Hackman

Franchisor 101: All the King’s Poachers

Lewitt Hackman on

A federal appellate court held that Burger King and its franchisees may violate Section 1 of the Sherman Act (antitrust) by engaging in concerted action when entering into “no-hire” agreements. The appellate court reversed...more

Troutman Pepper Locke

Recent No-Poach Developments: Hold the Pickle, Hold the Dismissal — Eleventh Circuit Overturns Burger King's District Court...

Troutman Pepper Locke on

In early September, the Eleventh Circuit reversed the district court’s judgment for defendants Burger King Corporation, Burger King Worldwide, Inc., and their ultimate parent Restaurant Brands International, Inc....more

Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP

Recent Trends in No-Poach Litigation

Federal district courts around the country continue to grapple with how to analyze “no-poach” agreements — whereby two or more companies agree not to hire or recruit each other’s workers — under the antitrust laws. Beginning...more

Robins Kaplan LLP

Financial Daily Dose 12.13.2019 | Top Story: US Announces Phase One Trade Agreement With China, But No Confirmation From Chinese

Robins Kaplan LLP on

The US and China have reportedly reached an initial agreement on the “final terms of a phase one trade deal, moving both countries closer to signing a pact that” the White House originally announced in October and averting...more

Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP

'Titans' of Antitrust Policy Clash Over No-Poach Agreements

Legal battles over the antitrust treatment of no-poach agreements continue to escalate with new district court decisions and new pronouncements from two “titans” of antitrust policy, the Department of Justice (DOJ) and the...more

Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP

No-Poach Update: DOJ Seeks to Rein In Franchise Suits

Evolving antitrust treatment of so-called “no-poach” agreements continues to offer important guidance for company counsel and human resources professionals. Over the past two years, the Department of Justice (DOJ) has...more

Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley

United States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation – January 2019 Hearing Session Preview

The next hearing session of the United States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (“JPML”) is scheduled for January 31, 2019 in Miami, Florida. Six matters are set for oral argument to consider motions to transfer each...more

Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP

Spotlight on No-Poach Agreements Continues, Expands to New Industries

In recent weeks, Washington State Attorney General Bob Ferguson has continued to expand his efforts to eradicate the use of no-poach agreements by employers. The targets of his investigation are companies that have included...more

Lewitt Hackman

FRANCHISOR 101: Thrust Into Antitrust

Lewitt Hackman on

Jimmy John’s will face antitrust claims, after an Illinois federal judge declined to dismiss allegations in a class action. Plaintiffs claim the chain’s franchise agreement harmed competition by preventing franchisee...more

Lewitt Hackman

FRANCHISOR 101: No Poach for You

Lewitt Hackman on

Franchise agreements commonly prohibit the franchisee from soliciting or hiring workers employed by the franchisor or other franchisees. This may take the form of “no-hire” or “no-switching” clauses that prohibit hiring each...more

Parker Poe Adams & Bernstein LLP

Employees Again Sue Jimmy John's Based on Hiring Restriction

A few years ago, the Jimmy John’s sandwich restaurant chain ran into problems over noncompetition agreements entered into with hourly workers at its franchisees’ stores. Several state attorneys general contended that...more

Lewitt Hackman

FRANCHISEE 101: Locked In to One Approved Vendor

Lewitt Hackman on

Franchisors often require franchisees to purchase supplies, materials, or inventory only from suppliers the franchisor approved. But where franchisors see benefits of consolidating by requiring franchisees to participate in...more

15 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 1

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide